ibanezfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Testing additions to Specifications table
I've recently been toying with some possible additions to the template which creates the specifications tables used in guitar model articles. I've implemented these changes in and applied them to the article on the TAM100 as a trial. The new fields are: # msrp (manufacturer's suggested retail price) & smap (suggested minimum advertised price) get displayed in the top section with the label "Price:" # strings records the gauge of the factory-installed strings and gets displayed in the third column with the label "String gauge:" # tuning records the factory tuning pattern and gets displayed in the third column with the label "Factory tuning:" In addition, I modified the header of the third column to display as "Electronics/ Strings" if either of the strings or tuning parameters is provided (otherwise it displays simply as "Electronics"). Each of the additional fields is optional and will only show up if a value is provided, which makes these changes backward-compatible. I'd like to get some feedback from the community before implementing any of these changes into the productions template. Do you think any of these has value, or is it just too much information/detail? Deejayk (talk) 15:59, April 22, 2016 (UTC) :After a bit of discussion I've implemented the strings and tuning parameters from the sandbox in the template. We've decided that the pricing information may need some more work in terms of presentation and layout, so that piece remains in the sandbox. Please feel free to start adding the "strings" and "tuning" parameters to any pages you feel they're appropriate (they might not add much if they're very "typical" values). :Today, I've added another parameter to the : :* tuners records the type of machine heads installed on a guitar model, which is displayed on the page with the label "Machine heads:". See TM1702M for an example of this parameter in use. Again, this parameter is completely optional, so if it is not provided for a particular model, the line in the specifications table simply won't appear. :Again, please let me know if you have an opinion about the usefulness or presentation of this new parameter. I'd love to get feedback whether it is pro, con or indifferent, so that a determination can be made as to whether this parameter should be added to the "normal" Speclist template. In the meantime, feel free to add the "tuners" parameter to any page, but please don't change the Speclist template to point to the sandbox version — you can do so for testing only, but revert to the normal Speclist when you're done. Rock on! \m/ DeeJayKTalk! 17:36, April 25, 2016 (UTC) ::Hi, I already left my first impressions on the Talk:RGD2120Z (I post the link here to keep track of this discussion). To make it short: :*I'm 100% ok with the "Strings/Tuning" fields, and the new "Tuners" as well. We only use them when needed and it is just a little piece of information that doesn't harm the design of the page. :*Prices are a different story, it is a whole lot bunch of information that need its own specific design. I would suggest to create a completely new page for this (like "2016 Prices" including all zones, with a table where you can sort columns by guitar name, price, country or anything). To me it is much better than adding this to the existing guitar pages and it makes comparison between models much easier than browsing several individual pages. To be discussed again :) --KainTGC (talk) 17:20, April 26, 2016 (UTC) :::Unless someone speaks up against it here, I'll plan on implementing the tuners parameter into the Speclist within the next week. In the meantime, you can start adding it to any articles as you see fit and it will magically show up once the changes are made to the template. :::I've put the price presentation on the back-burner for now while I think about a better way to represent it. I don't mind your suggestion to add a page including a sortable list of models and prices, but I still feel like price is one important piece of data that is currently missing from the guitar model articles. Since presumably web searches for individual model numbers are a primary driver of traffic to this site I feel like if the price information were isolated to a separate page, I don't know that the casual user would ever find it. At some point, I'll try to come up with another proposal that better addresses some of the complexities with the presentation. I did run across a good source of price information for 1978–2001 models and a 1977 price list (linking them here so that I can find them later). \m/ DeeJayKTalk! 20:08, April 26, 2016 (UTC) ::::Quote: "web searches for '''individual model numbers' are a primary driver of traffic to this site''": You're right, and many people will not even notice it if a specific "prices page" is created aside, I'm afraid. Also, I'm not again big changes, but one step at a time: the (my) general idea is to make things no more no less complex than there are already, and make shure the wiki is fully up-to-date regarding all the recent, missing models. To be honest I'm not planning to add any price information because it is a LOT of additional work and I REALLY don't want to bother with it yet, seeing how huge the task will be. But we can discuss it all we want of course. (Maybe we could create a new price-related thread to keep on discussing it, keeping this one for less "controversial" upgrades)? --KainTGC (talk) 21:26, April 26, 2016 (UTC) :::::I've added the tuners parameter to the template. \m/ DeeJayKTalk! 20:30, May 3, 2016 (UTC)